A conviction based on the testimony of a sole injured witness is unsafe if the evidence is self-contradictory, inconsistent with medical records or initial statements, lacks independent corroboration, and fails to establish the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt.

COMMON JUDGMENT

These Criminal Appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction made in Spl.S.C.No.38 of 2013, dated 11.07.2018, on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram.

2. The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in Spl.S.C.No.38 of 2013, on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram.

3. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties will hereinafter be referred as per their status/ranking in the trial Court.

4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Muthukulathur Sub Division laid a final report against the accused alleging that the defacto complainant belongs to Hindu Pallar Community, whereas the accused belongs to Hindu Maravar Community and there existed enmity between the first accused and the defacto complainant, as the defacto complainant demanded the return of the amount lent to the first accused for construction of a house. On 05.09.2011 at about 06.30p.m., when the complainant along with the witnesses Chandrasekar and Murugan were chatting near Gandhi Statute, Muthukulathur, the accused 1 and 2 came to that place and the first accused abused the complainant in filthy language using caste name and caught him and the second accused stabbed him on his left chin, shoulder and abdomen and thereafter fled away from the scene of occurrence and that thereby the first accused had committed the offences under Sections 294(b), 342, 307 I.P.C., r/w 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act and the second accused under Sections 294(b), 324, 326, 307 I.P.C., r/w 3(1)(x) and under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

5. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Muthukulathur had taken the charge sheet on file in P.R.C.NO.2/2012 and furnished the copies of records under Section 207 Cr.P.C., on free of costs. The learned Magistrate finding that the offences under Section 307 I.P.C., and the offences under sections SC/ST (POA) Act are triable by the Court of Sessions, after compliance under Sections 208 and 209 Cr.P.c., had committed the case to the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram.

6. After appearance of the accused, the learned Sessions Judge, on hearing both sides and on perusal of records, being satisfied that there existed a prima facie case against the accused, framed charges under Sections 294(b), 307, 342, 326 r/w 34 I.P.C., and Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(2) (v) of SC/ST (POA) Act against the first accused and under Section 326 I.P.C., and under Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act against the second accused and the same were read over and explained to them and on being questioned, they denied the charges and pleaded not guilty.

7. The prosecution, to prove its case, examined 10 witnesses as P.W. 1 to P.W.10 and exhibited 14 documents as Exs.P.1 to P.14.

8. The case of the prosecution emerging from the evidence adduced by the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

(a) P.W.5 – Vairavaraj, the defacto complainant is now in abroad, was residing at Ettacheri Village. He belongs to Hindu Pallar Community. Both the accused belong to Hindu Thevar Community. On 05.09.2011, P.W.5 along with P.W.1 – Chandrasekar and P.W.8 – Murugan were chatting near Gandhi Statute, Muthukulathur. Both the accused came to that place and scolded in filthy words. P.W.1 advanced a loan of Rs.30,000/- out of which, Rs.20,000/- was repaid. When the balace of Rs.10,000/- was demanded, the first accused abused him in filthy language using caste name. When the first accused caught hold of his hand, the second accused stabbed on his left shoulder with a knife and thereafter stabbed